Search
Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in

DirectX 10 Games vs. Contemporary Graphics

Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
Graphics card Master

Nice review:
http://xbitlabs.com/articles/video/display/directx10-ga...

Despite its unassuming performance in DirectX 9 benchmarks, the ATI Radeon HD 2900 XT is capable of beating the Nvidia GeForce 8800 GTX, which is much more expensive, in DirectX 10 applications provided that the Catalyst driver has game-specific optimizations. Of course, Nvidia’s ForceWare driver has to “know” the particular game to run it at a high speed, too.
The ATI Radeon HD 2600 XT and HD 2400 XT are kind of DirectX 10 kings in their respective price categories. However, these cards often prove to be slower than Nvidia’s GeForce 8 in the more important DirectX 9 applications.
The ATI Radeon HD 2000 architecture features the most advanced implementation of DirectX 10 today.
Performance of both ATI Radeon HD 2000 and Nvidia GeForce 8 is fully dependent on drivers, therefore, it is nearly unpredictable which graphics card will eventually become better DirectX 10 performer.

More about : directx games contemporary graphics

Register or log in to remove

I think it´s rather unimportant which of the cards performs better at Dx10. Once developers really implement DX10 and use its features not just as a marketing gimmick to get that that somewhat magical DX10 sticker on their box, the current cards will be at least two generations behind what´s available by then.

well... why not using recent drivers for the review ?? and recent games like Bioshock, Word in Conflict which are dominated by 8800s in both dx9 & dx10 ?
I wouldnt take the results of this review for granted. Anyway, I agree with Slobogob.
Related ressources
Ask the community

DX10 is useless IMHO at the moment and XP is still the best OS for gaming. I am awaiting Crysis with baited breath and have seen the comparison of it running in DX9 vs DX10, the difference is hardly noticable. Like Slobogob said, DX10 shouldn't be a factor at all since there aren't any games using it at the moment. In a year or two it may make a difference but by then the 8800GTX will be low man on the totem pole. As an owner of an 8800GTX, I am quite happy with it. It does everything (so far) that I need it to do. But if you have Vista/DX10 already, it probably won't matter what card you have. the 8800GTX and the 2900XT will still run slow as a snail.
Graphics card Master

yes , it will take quite a lot of time for game makers to move to dx10 , and also as another owner of 8800gtx , its a solid card , plays everything @ ultra high with very good FPS

The Call of Juarez benchmark isn't too relevant. All cards perform like crap there.The 8800 performs well in Bioshock, and from what I've heard, Crysis under DX10 mode performs well on high details with one.

timinator said:
DX10 is useless IMHO at the moment and XP is still the best OS for gaming. I am awaiting Crysis with baited breath and have seen the comparison of it running in DX9 vs DX10, the difference is hardly noticable. Like Slobogob said, DX10 shouldn't be a factor at all since there aren't any games using it at the moment. In a year or two it may make a difference but by then the 8800GTX will be low man on the totem pole. As an owner of an 8800GTX, I am quite happy with it. It does everything (so far) that I need it to do. But if you have Vista/DX10 already, it probably won't matter what card you have. the 8800GTX and the 2900XT will still run slow as a snail.

At least according to one source (Gamespot - and I don't know how credible they are anymore) DX10 lighting effects result in a dramatically better immersion in Crysis. FWIW.
Register or log in to remove
 
Ask the community
Read discussions in other Graphics & Displays categories
!